Topic: why dont we see ourselves in terms of gold in terms of speculation/price movemen (Read 614 times)
June 29, 2015, 06:11:11 AM
June 29, 2015, 02:41:48 AM
gold isn't a standard to measure the value of something else, because itself is based on fiat too, it's like we take any altcoin to measure bitcoin, it does not make much sense imho
also you should evaluate something against its competitor, not against what it is akin
also you should evaluate something against its competitor, not against what it is akin
yes i can see now the problems with dollars but do not agree we should not measure bitcoin against gold in some way. Bitcoin is in competition with gold albeit not in the same way as fiat. perhaps a better measure would be something like - comparing the gold to bitcoin buying and holding levels of all those people who are under 30? or something else that looks at uptake/use etc.
I realise there are lots of measurement issues but if bitcoin wants to be taken seriously (and get more users) it needs to be seen as an active participant in the market place and being 'measured'/'compared' in various ways is part of that. People get confidence from the new (here bitcoin) in part by seeing it in terms of/contrasted/compared to the old/familiar (here gold)
if you start to compare it to, too many currencies and commodities, it would start to rise some confusion, also gold isn't the main currency of any country, it is better to measure bitcoin with fiat, better if we choose the strongest ones
another problem is that for example right now the euro is getting weaker, and when i see the value of bitcoin against euro that is rising, one could think that bitcoin is rising, but in fact it isn't, it is just that euro is weaker and usd is rising, was exactly the case yesterday
i saw the price was 225 euro and still 251 in usd....
June 28, 2015, 06:17:06 PM
Bitcoin/gold chart can only be used as a reference because the market for that trading pair is small. It is like forex, currencies are normally quoted against other major currencies.
June 28, 2015, 05:49:05 PM
gold isn't a standard to measure the value of something else, because itself is based on fiat too, it's like we take any altcoin to measure bitcoin, it does not make much sense imho
also you should evaluate something against its competitor, not against what it is akin
also you should evaluate something against its competitor, not against what it is akin
yes i can see now the problems with dollars but do not agree we should not measure bitcoin against gold in some way. Bitcoin is in competition with gold albeit not in the same way as fiat. perhaps a better measure would be something like - comparing the gold to bitcoin buying and holding levels of all those people who are under 30? or something else that looks at uptake/use etc.
I realise there are lots of measurement issues but if bitcoin wants to be taken seriously (and get more users) it needs to be seen as an active participant in the market place and being 'measured'/'compared' in various ways is part of that. People get confidence from the new (here bitcoin) in part by seeing it in terms of/contrasted/compared to the old/familiar (here gold)
June 28, 2015, 01:24:34 PM
I know we want bitcoin to be a competitor to fiat etc but when looking at in terms of price movements should we not be using gold in all these charts as bitcoin it is sort of a electronic gold ie gold has much of the stored value etc features we hope for bitcoin.
to that end on 1 january 2015 an ounce cost 3.79 bitcoin. Today it costs around 4.88 bitcoin. in other words we are going backwards - ie we are not convincing the real and conservative world we are at least as good if not better than their traditional safe haven.
Comments?
to that end on 1 january 2015 an ounce cost 3.79 bitcoin. Today it costs around 4.88 bitcoin. in other words we are going backwards - ie we are not convincing the real and conservative world we are at least as good if not better than their traditional safe haven.
Comments?
I agree that there should be a gold:BTC market shown. The problem is that no one will trade this par, so people don't show it.
It was big news when parity was reached, so people do see a link, but generally is it ignored and I agree that it shouldn't be.
Electronic gold doesn't sound good to me though, that sounds like non-physical gold, which is bad. I prefer internet money!
June 28, 2015, 03:14:25 AM
gold isn't a standard to measure the value of something else, because itself is based on fiat too, it's like we take any altcoin to measure bitcoin, it does not make much sense imho
also you should evaluate something against its competitor, not against what it is akin
also you should evaluate something against its competitor, not against what it is akin
June 28, 2015, 12:18:13 AM
I know we want bitcoin to be a competitor to fiat etc but when looking at in terms of price movements should we not be using gold in all these charts as bitcoin it is sort of a electronic gold ie gold has much of the stored value etc features we hope for bitcoin.
to that end on 1 january 2015 an ounce cost 3.79 bitcoin. Today it costs around 4.88 bitcoin. in other words we are going backwards - ie we are not convincing the real and conservative world we are at least as good if not better than their traditional safe haven.
Comments?
to that end on 1 january 2015 an ounce cost 3.79 bitcoin. Today it costs around 4.88 bitcoin. in other words we are going backwards - ie we are not convincing the real and conservative world we are at least as good if not better than their traditional safe haven.
Comments?
Jump to: